you are just another left wing whack. go sit in front of the tv your mommy bought you and watch msnbc.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Awards Executives 1,000,000 Shares of Stock to Stay Until 2016
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
you are just another left wing whack. go sit in front of the tv your mommy bought you and watch msnbc.
It seems the people who want change don't exactly know what sort of change they want.
Yeah, they want more money to be redistributed to them. Question is, how much is enough, and have they actually done enough to warrant that amount?
You can argue that Steve didn't either, but the fact is that he designed a great product which everybody wanted. They parted with their money of their own free will, no one confiscated it from them or twisted their arm into buying one. They got a product they wanted, Steve got their money, why are people complaining now that he is getting more than his fair share, when they are the ones who put it into his pocket in the first place?
Yeah, they want more money to be redistributed to them. Question is, how much is enough, and have they actually done enough to warrant that amount?
You can argue that Steve didn't either, but the fact is that he designed a great product which everybody wanted. They parted with their money of their own free will, no one confiscated it from them or twisted their arm into buying one. They got a product they wanted, Steve got their money, why are people complaining now that he is getting more than his fair share, when they are the ones who put it into his pocket in the first place?
Question: Why would Apple need to bribe their employees to stay there? I would think Apple is a great place to work.
It seems the people who want change don't exactly know what sort of change they want.
Yeah, they want more money to be redistributed to them. Question is, how much is enough, and have they actually done enough to warrant that amount?
You can argue that Steve didn't either, but the fact is that he designed a great product which everybody wanted. They parted with their money of their own free will, no one confiscated it from them or twisted their arm into buying one. They got a product they wanted, Steve got their money, why are people complaining now that he is getting more than his fair share, when they are the ones who put it into his pocket in the first place?
I'm not envious of the money to want it distributed my way. The want of money and the false sense of self-worth money brings to people is the problem. While Steve Jobs had money, his sense of worth and purpose in the world had little to do with money. We can learn a few things from Jobs. Except for creating human inequities, money has little value. It certainly doesn't buy creative excellence.
A lot of people are eager to escape the American dream. I see a broken health care system, unsustainable postal service, massive military debts, skyrocketing unemployment, underfunded social security, 40 million citizens living in poverty and one of the world's highest incarceration rates (in for-profit prisons, no less).
Unrestrained capitalism simply doesn't work.
McDonalds is hiring. Stinking hippies feel entitled to certain jobs. Jobs exists Americans just won't take them.
Wow, the right really got you didn't they?!
I'll take my chances here, where I'll be getting better employment rights (almost 7 weeks paid leave, long term sick pay if needed, protection from unfair dismissal, paternity leave etc), free healthcare at the point of service, better consumer rights, government student loans for all etc. Yeah, liberal societies suck!
Really? I guess throwing rocks at cops and setting cars ablaze really works....
You're absolutely correct. There's plenty of jobs, but as Americans we're too lazy and entitled to lower ourselves to work those jobs.
The people wanting socialistic societies have to realize that in order for them to work, unemployment needs to be near zero. If you have arms to raise a can for change, you'll have to start working. Everyone needs to contribute for socialism to work. I just don't think the average U.S. citizen is prepared for that.
Last edited:
oh sorry, whats the debate about? Was too busy counting my 400% appreciation in my AAPL stock during the last five years.
that's quite a bit of money for them. but good for them. they are doing good work - they just got to keep it up
Interesting that you would use the diamond analogy. Diamonds are actually anything but precious. They are extemely plentiful. It is through the control of the diamond market by a few corporations (primarily DeBeers) that the supply is constrained to create a false sense of "rarity" (that and millions in advertising). Not worth anywhere near what they cost (much like the execs you defend).
----------
So you're equating the OWS protesters and those of us who speak out against corporate excess with a villian deserving to die? Now that's what I expect from the rabid tea party fanatics that support the devaluing of human lives and the concentration of wealth in the hands of the privileged few. Guess what? You will never be in that group. You will spend your life defending their right to steal the earth's natural and human resources, but they will never let you in the club. So go ahead, dream on. Can't really help people who can't think for themselves.
It's good to be the 1%. Join us!
----------
It does work. It is all these constraining govt. regulations holding it back from working right. Next generation of astronauts will be decked out with advertising like NASCAR drivers. If it wasn't for Kennedy starting the Space Race instead of Eisenhower, we'd have Coke banners on the LEM and advertising in flight with product placement and a celebrity astronaut. Better a nude zero-g spread for Playboy during the Apollo flights pissing off the church types. Hell, miss July 1969 was hot! (http://www.freeweb.hu/playmate/html/6907.html) I want to see her naked on the moon. But noooo --- we had to have LBJ and his Great Society crap thinking that social workers and consolidated traffic laws could change the world for the better. It didn't work! The Pittsburgh Left it still legal in western PA and most of Ohio!
----------
The hell with the raping the earth, mother earth is such a slut now taking it in so many holes, we had to make new ones. I want to start mining Mars and the Asteroid Belt. Lots of virgins to deflower there.
----------
It does work. It is all these constraining govt. regulations holding it back from working right. Next generation of astronauts will be decked out with advertising like NASCAR drivers. If it wasn't for Kennedy starting the Space Race instead of Eisenhower, we'd have Coke banners on the LEM and advertising in flight with product placement and a celebrity astronaut. Better a nude zero-g spread for Playboy during the Apollo flights pissing off the church types. Hell, miss July 1969 was hot! (http://www.freeweb.hu/playmate/html/6907.html) I want to see her naked on the moon. But noooo --- we had to have LBJ and his Great Society crap thinking that social workers and consolidated traffic laws could change the world for the better. It didn't work! The Pittsburgh Left it still legal in western PA and most of Ohio!
----------
The hell with the raping the earth, mother earth is such a slut now taking it in so many holes, we had to make new ones. I want to start mining Mars and the Asteroid Belt. Lots of virgins to deflower there.
It's this thinking that should further fuel "occupy wall street"
Their salaries should be incentive enough, adding 60 million worth of stock on top of other bonuses is sheer greed. I know, this will never happen as the excuse is that they HAVE to do this otherwise for retention purposes!!!
Good for them!
I have no problem with them getting that sort of incentive... If the board of directors feels they add that sort of value to Apple, that's their prerogative. If they weren't good at their jobs (i.e. making the shareholders happy), the board wouldn't care if they stayed or left. I'm guessing they're adding a lot more value to Apple than Peyton Manning is adding to the Indianapolis Colts at the moment - he'll make $23M for being injured. I don't recall anybody picketing the NFL because the players are overpaid and ticket prices are too high.
I have no problem with them getting that sort of incentive... If the board of directors feels they add that sort of value to Apple, that's their prerogative. If they weren't good at their jobs (i.e. making the shareholders happy), the board wouldn't care if they stayed or left. I'm guessing they're adding a lot more value to Apple than Peyton Manning is adding to the Indianapolis Colts at the moment - he'll make $23M for being injured. I don't recall anybody picketing the NFL because the players are overpaid and ticket prices are too high.
Last edited:
I think you'd be surprised how many of us are actually pretty moderate. I for one walk the middle road... I don't have a set party affiliation. I agree with the left on some things, the right on others (mostly economic policy)... in the end though no one should vote down party lines, but hey, that's an issue for another time.
The point is, these executives are only as valuable as people speculate they are-- just like stocks. They have an appraised value based on intangible worth; it's a qualitative evaluation based on some loosely correlated assets (mainly competitor poaching risk analysis). As such their worth modulates like stocks, and here Apple is simply trying to retain these people by giving them vested money so that they won't be hired off elsewhere in the immediate future.
If it was all about self-rewarding and money grubbing then Tim Cook would have given himself a nice fat bonus too.
It sadly seems many Americans have been trained to view any kind of regulation helping people (and themselves) to be unacceptable socialism.
A couple of pages ago I pointed out how workers in the US often get a bad deal compared to employment rights in the EU, and was told I was lazy. It's sad some people have been trained to think like that. I'm currently a student, but I have a job lined up already that starts about a week after my last exam. I'll be training as a commercial lawyer, where there will be long hours. However, I'll be getting all kinds of employment rights the government mandates like generous paid holiday.
We can see the US 'free market' has failed to match these kinds of things, yet that's somehow seen as a good thing. I'll be paying high taxes, but I accept I get a lot for that. I want to know I can get paid time away from the office to go on holiday and visit family, and that if I were to get really ill my income would be protected for a while, I'm planning a wedding next year and I want to know one day my wife will be able to get decent paid maternity leave (and I paternity leave) and free medical care, I wnant to know I can't be fired without good reason and that I'm entitled to redundancy pay if things so south. I'm not asking for a free ride and I'm not trying to be lazy, I'm just happy to pay taxes to get all these benefits and more.
My degree (which my career requires) cost me ~£3k a year in tuition, which as a UK citizen I was automatically entitled to a government loan for, which is only paid back as a percentage of my future earnings above a certain level and at an interest rate linked to inflation. On top of that I was automatically entitled to ~£3.5k to help with living expenses, if my family income had been lower I could have borrowed more and if it was really low I could have been given the money as part loan and part grant. If I don't pay it off after 25 years what's left is written off, although I hope I do! The entire course cost less than 1 years tuition in an equivalent US uni, and the UK is quite expensive compared to much of Europe!
I saw someone in response to the OWS movement saying how she had been responsible by picking a community college in the US because it's cheaper, like that's a good thing. I simply picked the best uni I could get into because they all cost practically the same thanks to government caps and funding.
Last edited:
It doesn't really matter whether you like an extremely capitalistic system or not. The US system is doomed and it would have already collapsed had in not been for the 'socialism for the 1%' via banking bailouts. Capitalists can't keep putting a gun to the taxpayer's head and keep robbing them forever. Everything has a tipping point.
I've actually worked for a large co-operative business and while execs got paid a lot more than the little guys the little guys got a fat bonus if the company did well, that meant they were paid significantly more than the industry average by up to 15-20%. Were they more engaged, harder working? You bet. Yet the company competed successfully in a capitalist system in large part because they workers gave more of a **** than non-co-operative businesses.
Whatever system you have there is no excuse for greed, no excuse for senior directors to rob the company pot while the rank and file get a kick in the teeth. Doesn't need to be that way.
I've actually worked for a large co-operative business and while execs got paid a lot more than the little guys the little guys got a fat bonus if the company did well, that meant they were paid significantly more than the industry average by up to 15-20%. Were they more engaged, harder working? You bet. Yet the company competed successfully in a capitalist system in large part because they workers gave more of a **** than non-co-operative businesses.
Whatever system you have there is no excuse for greed, no excuse for senior directors to rob the company pot while the rank and file get a kick in the teeth. Doesn't need to be that way.
Last edited:
The thing is that all these "rights" aren't entirely without costs of their own.
Looking at the EU, their socialism doesn't exactly come free of charge. It is fueled through high taxes, and even then, it appears (to me at least) that the whole system is at risk of imploding under its own bloated mess. Just look at France as an example, and all the hurdles their president has to jump through just to enact a seemingly straightforward legislation extending the retirement age.
Not to mention that considering the state of affairs Europe is currently in, I would hardly use them as a sterling example of how a country ought to be governed.
I was equating Marxism/Leninism with campy cinema villainy, in the stereotypical way movie monsters seem to "come back" from what would seem to be certain death blows. Way to "awfulize" the analogy into some grand statement of murderous intent against the left by the Tea Party. The extent to which OWS protestors embrace Marxism is the extent of that comparison, really. Marxism, for all its academic rigors, has been debunked as a workable economic model in every way possible, and yet it won't die. The only reason it "works" in China is because they don't operate like idealistic Marxists--they use the mechanisms of capitalism to facilitate their autocracy. Certainly they aren't clamping down on the bold free markets in cities like Hong Kong and Shanghi! For some reason Marxism still gives some well-to-do American college kids the warm fuzzies to fantasize about. If I were to hazard a guess, I would chalk that up to a mix of motivations: misguided altruism, intellectual elitism, a bid for personal validation and attention, and an effective way to piss off their parents.
BTW, while I am sympathetic to the Tea Party, I have never attended a rally or donated a dime to their cause. Your posts might drive me to finally do it, however.
Time will tell. I would be interested in knowing how you could ever make a statement like that. The threshold for being a 1%-er in the US is currently about $350k of adjusted gross income. How close am I to that line, and what do my prospects look like for the next year or two? How would you know?
Do you actually believe that "club" claptrap? Do you think there is actually a bouncer at the 1% Door, turning $350k earners away?
And how do you know my environmental positions? One can be a free market capitalist and still understand that reasonable environmental regulations are a valid role for the federal government to play, so long as the mandates are founded in solid science and not shrill, hyperbole-driven emotional overreactions.
Here is an example of what I mean by that. I live in suburban Chicago. If I were to purchase an electric car (fully electric, mind you, not a hybrid), people would judge me a wonderfully "green" person, a responsible member of society keeping Mother Earth pristine and denying the Evil Oil Companies their filthy lucre. And they would be wrong.
The additional environmental damage that mining for the rare earth metals that huge electric batteries require is significant, so the initial construction of the vehicle is less "green". But what about when the car is on the road? Matters are even worse. Chicago's electrical power comes from a coal burning plant. I see scores of coal cars cross our tracks daily. If you operate a fully electric passenger vehicle in Chicago, Illinois, you are actually, for all intents and purposes, running your car on COAL. COAL! Far dirtier than a gas combustion engine, and IIRC the burning of coal globally releases more radioactive material into our atmosphere on an annual basis than the entire nuclear industry has in its entire operational history.
FWIW I drive a VW diesel. Even with 120k on the engine I get over 50mpg on the highway, the environmental cost to make it were far less damaging than those that would be required for a hybrid (let alone a fully electric vehicle), and our diesel fuel here is usually a petrol/bio diesel blend of about 80/20. So my occasionally "sooty" diesel is far, far "greener" than an electric car at every stage.
So that's what I am talking about--real environmental consciousness and not "I want to be validated for my wonderful green-ness" groupthink.
I'll leave it to our readers to determine which of us is not thinking for his/herself. Or "different."
Last edited:
No it doesn't come free, it's paid for my taxes. But I'm happy to pay them as I probably couldn't get what I get in the US. I gave some examples above.The Eurozone is in trouble (that's different to the EU) due to a couple of countries being in big trouble, like Greece. I can't see the EU dissolving any time soon.
Besides, it's not all or nothing. I doubt the US would cope if they imposed loads of employment rights overnight, some people would have a heart attack! However, the US is the only developed nation with no provision for paid holiday as of right. Would it cripple your economy if you said everyone could take one week paid holiday, just one? I read 1/4 US workers don't get any at all. Or maybe saying everyone is entitled to one week notice if they are fired, just one? There are these basic things that millions don't have in the US, to be perfectly honest it strikes me as quite backwards and very sad.
Last edited:
Not to mention that considering the state of affairs Europe is currently in, I would hardly use them as a sterling example of how a country ought to be governed.
You could say the same about the US. You were in the same exact position 3 years ago, don't kid yourself. The bailouts were a safety net for the banks (you could argue it was a socialist policy), why not also have a safety net for individuals? You do realize that your credit rating has been downgraded right? That means your country has poor fiscal management and it's only going to get worse if the middle class continues to allow lax regulations on banks and tax laws.
At the G20 meetings it's been widely acknowledged that Canada's fiscal policies should be the one to model. OH NOES!! SOCIALISM!
Complete BS.
I am not from the US, I am actually from Singapore.
We don't really have safety nets here either. What passes for social security is paid entirely out of our own pockets (a portion of our monthly salary is taken away, we only get it back upon retirement). The government does help with the poor, but otherwise doesn't really subsidies anything else. For most part, we are on our own.
So yeah, I have been raised in a no-socialism environment and taught to work hard for anything I want. So far, it's worked fairly well. I am not rich by any stretch, but earn enough for a decent living, and I find I am content.
We don't really have safety nets here either. What passes for social security is paid entirely out of our own pockets (a portion of our monthly salary is taken away, we only get it back upon retirement). The government does help with the poor, but otherwise doesn't really subsidies anything else. For most part, we are on our own.
So yeah, I have been raised in a no-socialism environment and taught to work hard for anything I want. So far, it's worked fairly well. I am not rich by any stretch, but earn enough for a decent living, and I find I am content.